Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T13:28:47.118Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

10 - Assessment and triage of hepatocellular carcinoma

from Section III - Organ-specific cancers – primary liver cancers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2016

Riccardo Lencioni
Affiliation:
University of Pisa School of Medicine
Jean-Francois H. Geschwind
Affiliation:
Yale University School of Medicine, Connecticut
Michael C. Soulen
Affiliation:
Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania Hospital, Philadelphia
Get access

Summary

Summary

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Unlike most solid cancers, future incidence and mortality rates for HCC were projected to largely increase in several regions around the world over the next decade. Given the complexity of the disease and the common association of HCC and cirrhosis, careful multidisciplinary assessment of tumor stage, liver function, and physical status is required for proper staging and therapeutic planning. Patients with early-stage HCC should be considered for any of the available curative therapies, including liver transplantation, surgical resection, and image-guided ablation.

Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization is recommended as the standard of care for the treatment of large or multinodular non-invasive tumors in patients who have neither evidence of hepatic decompensation nor extrahepatic spread of the disease, i.e., those cases classified as intermediate stage according to the Barcelona Clinic for Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system. Radioembolization with yttrium-90 (Y90) microspheres is increasingly used to treat patients at more advanced tumor stages, including those with portal vein invasion. The multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor sorafenib is the only systemic treatment currently available for HCC patients unsuitable for surgical or interventional therapies. Despite the recent advances and refinements in therapeutic strategies, tumor recurrence remains a challenge in patients with HCC. Several clinical trials investigating different combinations of locoregional and systemic treatments for preventing early recurrence and improving long-term outcomes are ongoing.

Introduction

HCC is the third leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Unlike most solid cancers, future incidence and mortality rates for HCC were projected to largely increase in several regions around the world over the next decade, mostly as a result of the dissemination of hepatitis B and C virus infection. Patients with cirrhosis are at the highest risk of developing HCC and should be monitored every 6 months with imaging techniques to diagnose the tumor at an early, asymptomatic stage. Lesions detected by imaging surveillance require proper diagnostic approach. Confirmation of tiny nodules as true HCC may be challenging, as pathologic changes inherent in cirrhosis – such as regenerative or dysplastic nodules – mimic a small tumor. Treatment choice is also difficult, given the complexity of the disease and the large number of potentially useful therapies, and requires careful multidisciplinary assessment of tumor stage, liver function, and physical status.

Type
Chapter
Information
Interventional Oncology
Principles and Practice of Image-Guided Cancer Therapy
, pp. 85 - 90
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. International Agency for Research on Cancer. World Health Organization. GLOBOCAN 2012: estimated cancer incidence, mortality, and prevalence worldwide in 2012. http://globocan.iarc.fr (accessed May 20, 2014).
2. Olsen, AH, Parkin, DM, Sasieni, P. Cancer mortality in the United Kingdom: projections to the year 2025. Br J Cancer 2008; 99: 1549–1554.Google Scholar
3. Davis, GL, Alter, MJ, El-Serag, H, et al. Aging of the hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected persons in the United States: a multiple cohort model of HCV prevalence and disease progression. Gastroenterology 2010; 138: 513–521.Google Scholar
4. Fong, ZV, Tanabe, KK. The clinical management of hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States, Europe, and Asia: a comprehensive and evidence-based comparison and review. Cancer 2014; 120: 2824–2838.Google Scholar
5. Bruix, J, Sherman, M; American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Management of hepatocellular carcinoma: an update. Hepatology 2011; 53: 1020–1022.Google Scholar
6. European Association for the Study of the Liver; European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer. EASL–EORTC clinical practice guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 2012; 56: 908–943.
7. Verslype, C, Rosmorduc, O, Rougier, P; ESMO Guidelines Working Group. Hepatocellular carcinoma: ESMO–ESDO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2012; 23 Suppl 7: vii41–48.Google Scholar
8. Lencioni, R. Evolving strategies in the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 2011; 54: 184–186.Google Scholar
9. Kojiro, M, Roskams, T. Early hepatocellular carcinoma and dysplastic nodules. Semin Liver Dis 2005; 25: 133–142.Google Scholar
10. Lencioni, R, Crocetti, L. Loco-regional treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Radiology 2012; 262: 43–58.Google Scholar
11. Yau, T, Tang, VY, Yao, TJ, Fan, ST, Lo, CM, Poon, RT. Development of Hong Kong Liver cancer staging system with treatment stratification for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Gastroenterology 2014; 146: 1691–1700.Google Scholar
12. Sherman, M. Staging for hepatocellular carcinoma: complex and confusing. Gastroenterology 2014; 146: 1599–1602.Google Scholar
13. Chapiro, J, Geschwind, JF. Hepatocellular carcinoma: have we finally found the ultimate staging system for HCC? Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014; 11: 334–336.Google Scholar
14. Mazzaferro, V, Lencioni, R, Majno, P. Early hepatocellular carcinoma on the procrustean bed of ablation, resection, and transplantation. Semin Liver Dis 2014; 34: 415–426.Google Scholar
15. Gervais, DA, Goldberg, SN, Brown, DB, Soulen, MC, Millward, SF, Rajan, DK. Society of Interventional Radiology position statement on percutaneous radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of liver tumors. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2009; 20 (7 Suppl): S342–S347.Google Scholar
16. Crocetti, L, Baere, T de, Lencioni, R. Quality improvement guidelines for radiofrequency ablation of liver tumours. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2010; 33: 11–17.Google Scholar
17. Lubner, MG, Brace, CL, Ziemlewicz, TJ, Hinshaw, JL, Lee, FT Jr. Microwave ablation of hepatic malignancy. Semin Intervent Radiol 2013; 30: 56–66.Google Scholar
18. Groeschl, RT1, Pilgrim, CH, Hanna, EM, et al. Microwave ablation for hepatic malignancies: a multiinstitutional analysis. Ann Surg 2014; 259: 1195–1200.Google Scholar
19. Cannon, R, Ellis, S, Hayes, D, Narayanan, G, Martin, RC 2nd. Safety and early efficacy of irreversible electroporation for hepatic tumors in proximity to vital structures. J Surg Oncol 2013; 107: 544–549.Google Scholar
20. Lu, DS, Kee, ST, Lee, EW. Irreversible electroporation: ready for prime time? Tech Vasc Interv Radiol 2013; 16: 277–286.Google Scholar
21. Silk, MT, Wimmer, T, Lee, KS, et al. Percutaneous ablation of peribiliary tumors with irreversible electroporation. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2014; 25: 112–118.Google Scholar
22. Dunne, RM, Shyn, PB, Sung, JC, et al. Percutaneous treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis: a comparison of the safety of cryoablation and radiofrequency ablation. Eur J Radiol 2014; 83: 632–638.Google Scholar
23. Li, GZ, Speicher, PJ, Lidsky, ME, et al. Hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: do contemporary morbidity and mortality rates demand a transition to ablation as first-line treatment? J Am Coll Surg 2014; 218: 827–834.Google Scholar
24. Chen, MS, Li, JQ, Zheng, Y, et al. A prospective randomized trial comparing percutaneous local ablative therapy and partial hepatectomy for small hepatocellular carcinoma. Ann Surg 2006; 243: 321–328.Google Scholar
25. Huang, J, Yan, L, Cheng, Z, et al. A randomized trial comparing radiofrequency ablation and surgical resection for HCC conforming to the Milan criteria. Ann Surg 2010; 252: 903–912.Google Scholar
26. Feng, K, Yan, J, Li, X, et al. A randomized controlled trial of radiofrequency ablation and surgical resection in the treatment of small hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 2012; 57: 794–802.Google Scholar
27. Wang, Y, Luo, Q, Li, Y, Deng, S, Wei, S, Li, X. Radiofrequency ablation versus hepatic resection for small hepatocellular carcinomas: a meta-analysis of randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials. PLoS ONE 2014; 9: e84484.Google Scholar
28. Lencioni, R, Kudo, M, Ye, SL, et al. GIDEON (Global Investigation of therapeutic DEcisions in hepatocellular carcinoma and Of its treatment with sorafeNib): second interim analysis. Int J Clin Pract 2014; 68: 609–617.Google Scholar
29. Lencioni, R. Chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma. Semin Oncol 2012; 39: 503–509.Google Scholar
30. Lammer, J, Malagari, K, Vogl, T, et al. Prospective randomized study of doxorubicin-eluting-bead embolization in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: results of the PRECISION V study. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2010; 33: 41–52.Google Scholar
31. Oliveri, RS, Wetterslev, J, Gluud, C. Transarterial (chemo) embolisation for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011; 3: CD004787.Google Scholar
32. Ray, CE, Haskal, ZJ, Geschwind, JFH, Funaki, BS. The use of transarterial chemoembolization in the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a response to the Cochrane Collaboration Review of 2011. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2011; 22: 1693–1696.Google Scholar
33. Forner, A, Llovet, JM, Bruix, J. Chemoembolization for intermediate HCC: is there proof of survival benefit? J Hepatol 2012; 56: 984–986.Google Scholar
34. Kulik, LM, Carr, BI, Mulcahy, MF, Lewandowski, RJ, Atassi, B, Ryu, RK, et al. Safety and efficacy of 90Y radiotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma with and without portal vein thrombosis. Hepatology 2008; 47: 71–81.Google Scholar
35. Riaz, A, Kulik, L, Lewandowski, RJ, Ryu, RK, Spear, G Giakoumis, et al. Radiologic-pathologic correlation of hepatocellular carcinoma treated with internal radiation using yttrium-90 microspheres. Hepatology 2009; 49: 1185–1193.Google Scholar
36. Salem, R, Lewandowski, RJ, Mulcahy, MF, Riaz, A, Ryu, RK, Ibrahim, S, et al. Radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma using Yttrium-90 microspheres: a comprehensive report of long-term outcomes. Gastroenterology 2010; 138: 52–64.Google Scholar
37. Salem, R, Lewandowski, RJ, Kulik, L, et al. Radioembolization results in longer time-to-progression and reduced toxicity compared with chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Gastroenterology 2011; 140: 497–507.Google Scholar
38. Salem, R, Mazzaferro, V, Sangro, B. Yttrium 90 radioembolization for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: biological lessons, current challenges, and clinical perspectives. Hepatology 2013; 58: 2188–2197.Google Scholar
39. Llovet, JM, Ricci, S, Mazzaferro, V, et al. Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. N Engl J Med 2008; 359: 378–390.Google Scholar
40. Cheng, AL, Kang, YK, Chen, Z, et al. Efficacy and safety of sorafenib in patients in the Asia-Pacific region with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase III randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2009; 10: 25–34.Google Scholar
41. Llovet, JM, Hernandez-Gea, V. Hepatocellular carcinoma: reasons for phase III failure and novel perspectives on trial design. Clin Cancer Res 2014; 20: 2072–2079.Google Scholar
42. Pawlik, TM, Reyes, DK, Cosgrove, D, Kamel, IR, Bhagat, N, Geschwind, J. Phase II trial of sorafenib combined with concurrent transarterial chemoembolization with drug-eluting beads for hepatocellular carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2012; 29: 3960–3967.Google Scholar
43. Lencioni, R, Llovet, JM, Han, G, et al. Sorafenib or placebo in combination with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) with doxorubicin-eluting beads (DEBDOX) for intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC): phase II, randomized, double-blind SPACE trial. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30 (suppl 4; abstr LBA154).Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×